I forgot Microcosmos.

DH got up and left the room a quarter of the way through The Scent of Green Papaya: "Nothing's happening." And it's true, it's a very.slow.movie. There's hardly any dialog, and all the action takes place on a very confined set of a house and courtyard. But the physical beauty is mesmerizing, and there are sounds of water dripping, rain, rustle of leaves, sounds of people turning over in bed, walking barefoot on bare floors, rustle of clothing. It is the same sort of narrow, close focus that draws people like me into that world, regardless of the lack of explosive actions or passionate dialog--though emotions are passionately felt. Yes, I can easily sit through two hours of dialog-less closeups of a field of grass as insects and birds and plants go about their tiny lives beneath sun, wind, rain.

I suppose my prediliction for interminably "boring" movies is a form of meditation, introspective reflection on Meaning. It's likely perceived as pretention, but honestly, I need the slowdown. I need the opportunity to and reminder of how to slow down and really look at things, to experience them sensually and, temporarily at least, suspend intellectual dissection and criticism.

Of course I can experience things sensually and suspend intellectual dissection and criticism with Diehard movies, too.

Have we seen this 'round these parts?

Tim Burton's new project, 9.

[link]

Surviving Picasso is another movie I really like that never came out on region 1.

OK. Time for my Wall-E rant. Now that I've seen it since Mal got it for Xmas.

I don't like it. It's better than A Bug's Life, but I don't think it's going to be remembered as one of Pixar's best. Yes, yes, I get the whole parable stuff, how Eve found a vegetative substance, gave it to the male leader of people, and it triggered him to gain a ton of Knowledge, after which he had to lead his people out of Eden (the Axiom). And it will amuse me to refer to the Serpent as "Wally" from now on. But I still don't think it was a good movie. And yes, I enjoyed all the references, both the Pixar standards (the yellow pickup truck, the Lumo light) and the other movie shout-outs (man learning to walk upright a la 2001, the assistant bots going around the circle hallway a la 2001, the Axiom in the nebula a la Star Trek, etc. And EVE rocks like a rocking thing. And the art and animation and esp. the sound were freaking awesome.

But there was no real antagonist - Auto was following his directive and wasn't sentient evil, regardless of whether he looked like HAL or not. And while all the humans we met seemed nice enough, I wasn't sure why I was rooting for the race.

Even B&L wasn't totally evil. B&L is certainly one possible future, but despite their capitalistic drive, they are the best corporation I've ever seen: at least one Wall-E model lasted 700 years, they built FTL starliners and had the foresight to build everything needed to keep them going forever. Even their earthside docks were still functional.

But...I don't believe any of the assumptions I was asked to make (spoilers)

(like Earth being habitable again, or babies being born or decanted on the Axiom, or A FREAKING SPACESHIP HEELING OVER TO STARBOARD, or the behavior of the EVE probes or...). And the resolution happened way too fast. And replacing a robot's motherboard doesn't make him lose his memory...and shocking him doesn't make it come back.

But you know what REALLY bugged me about it? I sat thru the whole thing, dodging the huge anvils of MESSAGE (the starliner should have been called Anvil), even to the end of the credits where Wall-E replaces Lumo's bulb with a new energy-saver bulb. And then I looked at all the Wall-E tie-in merchandising, esp. that bit of landfill-to-be that Mal got for Xmas, a small Wall-E that responds to sound and dances. And the hypocrisy of Disney/Pixar just pissed me off. They are Buy-n-Large, by and large.

Yes, yes, I get the whole parable stuff, how Eve found a vegetative substance, gave it to the male leader of people, and it triggered him to gain a ton of Knowledge, after which he had to lead his people out of Eden (the Axiom). And it will amuse me to refer to the Serpent as "Wally" from now on.

Huh. That never occurred to me. I thought her name was Eva and thought it was silly.

But there was no real antagonist - Auto was following his directive and wasn't sentient evil, regardless of whether he looked like HAL or not.

I'm not sure why that's a problem. And if Auto isn't "evil", than neither was HAL, who was also following his directive, even if it was malfunctioning.

The anti-corporate message from a Disney movie, however, was a contradiction I can appreciate having problems with. However, I think this IS going to be remembered as one of Pixar's best, especially given how (wonderfully) unconventional the first half of the movie was compared to other films of this type. And I totally didn't get a Garden of Eden parable out of it. At all.

I'm with Frank (as with most things movie related). I don't think a story requires an antagonist so much as an obstacle. And there were plenty of obstacles.

I do concur that it was pretty hypocritical for Dixar/Buy N Large to be lecturing us.

I didn't really care or mind about the edenic parable in the least. That's just subtext, and it's as good a framework as any to hang on the movie.

I loved the animation - particularly the scenes on ruined Earth. It's a huge leap forward technically and aesthetically.

And I loved the non-snake-like Wall-E a lot. He was constant in the face of adversity. He risked much for what he wanted. He was kind and steadfast. It was like Sam Gamgee falling in love with Aeryn Sun.

Heh. When you type in "Sam Gamgee" Google helpfully offers "Sam Gamgee Potatoes."

I liked the commentary on people who always have a cellphone to their ear--or (ahem) talk to people primarily through a screen of some sort. Hi, everybody!

It was like Sam Gamgee falling in love with Aeryn Sun.

Yes! This! Perfect analogy, Hec.